Capture a compact text view of the active tab: title, URL, headings, interactive elements with refs. Use refs to click, type, select, or hover; refs expire on new capture.
Compact text view of the active tab: title, URL, headings, and visible interactive elements tagged with refs like [e12]. Use the refs with click, type, select and hover. Refs expire when you take a new snapshot.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| maxElements | No | Default 150. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden, and it delivers the two most operationally important traits: the output is a compact text view with [e12]-style refs, and those refs are invalidated by any subsequent snapshot. It omits other traits such as whether the view is truncated or scroll-relative, which is why it falls short of a 5.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Three sentences, no padding, and the output shape is front-loaded ahead of the ref-usage and expiry rules. Every sentence earns its place by adding a distinct operational fact.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a single-optional-parameter read tool with no output schema, it covers the return shape, the ref format, the downstream tools, and the ref lifecycle. It leaves one gap: behavior when maxElements truncates the view, and no signal about scroll position or frames.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100% for the single maxElements parameter and its default is documented there ('Default 150.'). The description adds no meaning about how the cap affects output or what happens when elements are omitted, so the baseline 3 applies.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
States a specific verb and resource: a 'compact text view of the active tab' returning title, URL, headings and visible interactive elements. This cleanly distinguishes it from siblings like read (content extraction), screenshot (visual), and evaluate (scripting).
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Explicitly routes the agent forward: the emitted refs are meant for click, type, select and hover, and it warns that refs expire when a new snapshot is taken. It does not say when to prefer snapshot over read, evaluate, or pod_status, so the alternative-selection guidance is implied rather than stated.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.